No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 April 2015
Since the publication of Perry Miller's The New England Mind in 1939, Puritan covenantal thought has received renewed attention from scholars in a number of different fields. Many of these analyses have tended, however, either to ignore the essential theological grounding of this movement in Calvin and in English evangelicalism or to exaggerate the individualistic character of Puritan ethics through failure to give adequate attention to such communal themes as religious and civil covenants, equity, virtue, and the common good.
Thus, Perry Miller, for example, interpreted covenantal (or federal) theology as an attempt to resolve the antinomy in Calvinist doctrine between determinism and human freedom by making salvation dependent upon good works. While the idea of such a conditional covenant was fundamentally inconsistent with the traditional Calvinist doctrine of decrees, Miller argued, it did nevertheless provide a pragmatic albeit unstable means of reconciling human freedom and moral responsibility with the doctrine of decrees. When one examines such early covenantal writers as Perkins, Preston, Sibbes, and Ames, however, one finds that they turned to the imagery of covenant primarily out of the need to provide a basis for assurance of salvation and moral guidance, not to resolve a conflict between predestination and human freedom. The latter conflict had already been largely resolved within the framework of Calvinist doctrine. Not only did Miller's focus upon the problem of decrees cause him to misconstrue the relationship between Calvin and covenantal thought in important respects; it also caused him to neglect the evangelical sources of covenantal theology and ethics.
1. Miller, P., The New England Mind: The Seventeenth Century (1939)Google Scholar. In New England ‘covenant theology’ was commonly called ‘federal theology’. In the present essay these terms are used interchangeably.
2. Walzer, M., The Revolution of Saints: A Study in the Origin of Radical Politics (1965)Google Scholar.
3. Zaret, D., The Heavenly Contract: Theology and Organization in Pre-Revolutionary Puritanism (1985)Google Scholar.
4. Id. at 4.
5. In the present essay attention is focused primarily upon William Perkins, John Preston, Richard Sibbes, William Ames, and Richard Baxter in England and upon John Winthrop, John Cotton, Nathanial Ward, Jonathan Mitchell, John Willard, and Samuel Wise in New England. For a fuller description of the radical implications of covenantal thought, attention would need to be given to the Left-wing English sects; to the Army Debates, particularly the Putney Debates of 1647, over who should as a matter of justice participate in the civil covenant; and to the controversies of Roger Williams with Winthrop and John Cotton in New England over the limits of the political covenant. (I am particularly indebted to Professor David Little for his suggestions in this regard.) On the Putney Debates, see Puritanism and Liberty, Being the Army Debates (1647-49) from the Clarke Manuscripts with Supplementary Documents 1–124 (Woodhouse, A.S.P. ed. 1951)Google Scholar. On Williams' disputes with Winthrop and Cotton, see Miller, P., Williams, Roger: His Contribution To The American Tradition (1958)Google Scholar; and Morgan, E.S., Roger Williams: The Church and the State (1967)Google Scholar.
6. 2 J. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion Bk. 2, ch. 10, sec. 1 (1936)Google Scholar.
7. Perkins, W., A Golden Chain, in The Works of William Perkins 210–212 (Breward, I. ed. 1970)Google Scholar; Preston, J., The New Covenant, or The Saints' Portion 316 ff. (Eighth, Ed. Corrected 1634)Google Scholar; and Sibbes, R., The Faithful Covenanter, in 6 Works of Richard Sibbes 3–4 (Grosart, A. B. ed., 7 vols., 1862–64: reprinted 1973-83)Google Scholar.
8. Genesis 17:1-14.
9. Perkins, supra note 7, at 213-18; Preston, supra note 7, at 326 ff. See also Sibbes, supra note 7. Sibbes extends the covenant of grace back to Adam after the fall. The covenant which God made with Adam after the fall replaces the first pact based upon works. The covenant of grace was renewed with Abraham and with Moses, and it was established in its New Testament form by the death of Christ.
10. Perkins, supra note 7, at 210-11.
11. Preston, supra note 7, at 31s ff.
12. Sibbes, supra note 7, at 3.
13. 5 Ames, W., Conscience with the Power and Cases Thereof 107Google Scholar (divided into 5 books 1639).
14. Id. at 102-09. See also Baxter, R., A Holy Commonwealth 50–53 (1659)Google Scholar. For a discussion of natural law in Puritanism in the early 1600's see Eusden, J., Puritans, Lawyers, and Politics in Early Seventeenth-Century England 126 ff. (1958)Google Scholar. Eusden argues that Ames was exceptional among early Puritans in his appeal to natural law. Use of this idea subsequently became much more widespread, however, both among English and among American Puritans. On Ames' influence upon Puritanism generally but particularly in New England, see Introduction in Ames, W., The Marrow of Theology: William Ames 1576-1633 1–11 (Eusden, J. ed. 1968)Google Scholar.
15. Miller, supra note 1, at 384.
16. See McGiffert, , Covenant, Crown, and Commons in Elizabeth Puritanism, in 20 The Journal of British Studies 32–52 (Fall, 1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see especially 48-50.
17. W. Perkins, A Plain and Faithful Exposition Upon Two First Verses of the 2 Chapter of Zephaniah, Perkins, supra note 7, at 293-94.
18. McGiffert, supra note 16, at 48.
19. Id. at 50.
20. Walzer, supra note 2, at 145-46.
21. The Westminster Dictionary of Church History 755 (Brauer, J. ed. 1971)Google Scholar. See also Cunningham, J., 1 The Church History of Scotland: from the Commencement of the Christian Era to the Present Time 526–530 (Second ed., 2 vols., 1882)Google Scholar.
22. Baxter, supra note 14, at 458-59.
23. Puritan Political Ideas, 1558-1794 139 (Morgan, E. ed. 1965)Google Scholar.
24. Miller, supra note 1, at 448-49.
25. Id. at 448.
26. The American Puritans: Their Prose and Poetry 85–86 (Miller, P. ed. 1956)Google Scholar.
27. Id. at 89.
28. Winthrop, A Model of Christian Charity, in Miller, supra note 26, at 78-84; see 82.
29. Id. at 82-83.
30. Id. at 84.
31. Aristotle, , The Nicomachean Ethics 188 (Weldon, J.E.C. ed. 1930)Google Scholar.
32. Miller, supra note 1, at 483: “The great end toward which the theory aspired, the moral which the leaders worked to instill into the minds of the people, citizens, or inhabitants, was the principle of communal responsibility.”
33. Perkins, W., The Whole Treatise of Cases of Conscience, in William Perkins, 1558-1602 English Puritanist. His Pioneer Works on Casuistry: A Discourse of Conscience and the Whole Treatise of Cases of Conscience 79–240 (Merrill, T.F. ed. 1966)Google Scholar.
34. Merrill, supra note 33, at 163.
35. Id. at 164.
36. Id.
37. Ames, supra note 13, at Book 23, 61.
38. Id. at 82.
39. Perkins, supra note 7, at 187.
40. Preston, supra note 7, at 217.
41. Id. at 390.
42. Preston, J., Sermons Preached Before His Majestie, and Upon Other Special Occasions 111–112 (1634)Google Scholar.
43. Ames, supra note 13, at Book 5, 110. Ames considers this definition of virtue to be more adequate than the concept of justice as “a perpetual and constant intent of giving to every person his due.” Id. at 109-10.
44. Id. at 130.
45. Perkins, A Treatise on the Vocations or Callinqs of Men, in Perkins, supra note 7, at 446-47.
46. Id. at 449.
47. Baxter, R., How to do Good to Many, or The Public Good is the Christian Life. Directions and Motives to it (1682)Google Scholar.
48. Id. at 12.
49. Baxter, supra note 14, at 14.
50. Id.
51. Id. at 449.
52. Mitchell, Nehemiah on the Wall, in Miller, supra note 26, at 109.
53. Id. at 111.
54. Perkins, supra note 7, at 483.
55. Perkins, Epiekeia, or a Treatise on Christian Equity and Moderation, in Morgan, supra note 23, at 59-73; see 60.
56. Id.
57. Id. at 60-61.
58. Id. at 62.
59. Id.
60. Id. at 66.
61. Id. at 72-73.
62. Id. at 71.
63. Perkins, supra note 7, at 479-80.
64. Id. Breward characterizes Perkins treatment of conscience as “a modified Thomist position.” Id. at 63.
65. Id. at 480. Perkins' distinction between the extremity of the law and the mitigation of the law corresponds closely to Calvin's distinction between the two laws of equity in relation to the poor. “The first law of fair-dealing,” Calvin writes, “is that no one is to lay claim to another's property, but use only what he can rightfully call his own. The second is that no one is to swallow what belongs to him like a whirlpool, but he is to be kindly toward his neighbors and lighten their want by his abundance.” Calvin, , Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, in Calvin's Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians 420 (Torrance, D.W. and Torrance, T.F. eds. 1960)Google Scholar. See also Calvin, supra note 6, at Bk. 4, ch. 20 secs. 14-16. “Equity, being natural, is the same to all mankind; and consequently all laws, on every subject, ought to have the same equity for their end. Particular enactments and regulations, being connected with circumstances, and partly dependent upon them, may be different in different cases without any impropriety, provided they are all equally directed to the same object of equity…. This equity, therefore, must alone be the scope, and rule, and end, of all laws,” Id. at sec. 16.
66. Ames, supra note 13, at Book 5, 111.
67. Id.
68. Morgan, supra note 23, at 138.
69. Id. at 153.
70. Id at 155.
71. Id. at 136.
72. Miller, supra note 26, at 109.
73. Miller, , The Marrow of Puritan Divinity, in 32 Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts 294–300Google Scholar (Transaction 1933-37). Cf. Miller, supra note 1, at 111-206.
74. Willard, , The Character of a Good Ruler, in The Puritans 252 (Miller, P. and Johnson, T.H. eds. 1938)Google Scholar. See also Breen, T.H., The Character of the Good Ruler: A Study of Puritan Political Ideas in New England, 1630–1730 (1970)Google Scholar.
75. Morgan, supra note 23, at 60.
76. The original draft of this document, written by John Cotton, subsequently became the basic code of the New Haven Colony. A later draft, which was adopted by the Colony of Massachusetts, was written by Nathaniel Ward. Id at 177-78.
77. Id. at 178.
78. Id. at 179.
79. Miller, supra note 1, at 439-40.
80. See Morgan, supra note 23, at xi-xivii Cf. Buffinton, , The Massachusetts Experiment of 1630, in 32 Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts 308–20 (Transaction 1933–1937)Google Scholar.
81. Morgan, E.S., The Puritan Dilemma: The Story of John Winthrop 84 ff. (1958)Google Scholar.
82. Id. at 93.
83. According to John Wise, the principles of natural liberty, equity, equality, and self-preservation rest fundamentally upon reason. “Revelation,” Wise declared, “is nature's law in a fairer and brighter edition.” J. Wise, A Vindication of the Government of the New England Churches, and The Churches' Quarrel Espoused; or, A Reply to Certain Proposals 27–28 (1860)Google Scholar.
84. Morgan, supra note 23, at xli.
85. Id.
86. Locke, , An Essay Concerning the True Original, Extent and End of the Civil Government, in The English Philosophers from Bacon to Mill 404 (Burtt, E.A. ed. 1939)Google Scholar.
87. Cf. J. Dunn, Locke (1984), Ch.2, The Politics of Trust. “At the center of Locke's conception of government… was the idea of trust.” Id. at 52. A comparison of the ideas of trust in Locke and in Puritanism is anticipated in an ensuing study.